The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1887-06-10
ADDRESS OF ]. G. H. BUCK,
DELIVERED BEFORE THE
HlLLSBORO PROHIBI-
TION CLUB,
In HillsbOro, Texas, May 20.
Ladies and Gentlemen.


questions connected with prohibition.
The object Of this was explained to be
the presentation of the best evidences
accessible to establish the truth which
these questions involve. The question
of Personal Liberty is one, that of
Revenue is another, Does Prohibition
Prohibit? is another. 1t is with this
last that this night am 10 deal.
Hence my object shall be to take no
note of the consttutionalty of pro-
hibition, but will refer you for the
best information on that subject 10 the
American Annual Cyclopgdia for
1888, page $50, where will be found
eXtracte from the decisions of justices
fancy, Catron, Gricr and Mclean,
stating III terms clear, strong and un-
aus werable that the principle is in
strict accord with our constitution.
Again, TO a decision of the United
States Supreme Court handed down
on the 10th of November, 1884, which
fully disposes Of the difficulties
supposed to be thrown in
the way of prohibition by the
fourteenth amendment which declares
that mo State shall deprive any per-
son OF life, liberty or property, with
out due process of law" This decis-
ion is reported on the 429th page Of
the American Cyclopaedia Annual
1891. Again to another decision
handed down on the 9th of January
1885, by said court and found in the
same volume, pages $50 and 43l, which
declares that tue fourteenth amend
ment broad and comprehensive as it
is, ''was not designed to interfere
with the power of the State, some
times termed its police power, to pre-
scribe regulations to promote the
health, peace, mo ais, education and
good order of the people, and TO legis-
late so as to increase the industries Of
the State, develop its resources aud
add 10 its wealth and prosperity"
These decisions rendered by demo-
cratic judges of .S47 and Republican
Judges of 1884 accord with each other
and with text law-wrters such as
Blackstone, Kent and Cooley as well
as with all State supreme courts
throughout the constitution period of
our country's history, setting the
question so definitely as to draw from
judge Cooley the assertion that no
principle in american constitutional
law has been more fully and definitely
settled,
But does prohibition prohibit? We
realize the Importance ofthis question
and its true answer. Throughout our
state aud many Others ofthc Uu'on men
are now anxiously making this inquiry
They arc seeking information with IN
honest determination in many cases TO
vote for the amendment if they find
that the principle is capable of practi-
cal efiicacious enforcement. Nor do
we blame citizen for Withholding
his sup lort until the question is salts
factorily answered. II prohibition
prove failure many evil consequences
must follow, since it must educate III
the direction of violating law and fos-
tering ialsehood, dup.icity and hypOc-
:. L. hn...f in fhngR NNhn
make il failure. and the habit of
practiciug deceit, stealth and perjury.
1t must eDgende' contempt for author
ity, love OF trickcry and disregard
for honorable loyalty TO the Stale and
to the government a this must &C
company failure OF prohibition,
since only by the exercise of these
fearful qualities and trait can ii be
caused 10 fail. If the Jaw says thou
shalt not manufacture, sell or exchange
liquors" except for certain purposes,
il is clear that lie who does thus act,
can only do SO by exercising ialsehood,
fraud, deceit, stealth. perjury. Aud
what necessarily follows the extensive
and continual exercise OF any habit
good or bad? Clearly the strength
ening, confirming, fixing OF the iIait
or faculty thus exercised. THIS Is cd
ucating. This is training! This is dc
ve.opingl But if prohibition be cstab-
lished by whom will it be done. BY
a majority and by a majority who de-
sire it to prevail, 10 be a success.
Then who will cause il TO failI Anti
prohibitionists. men who vote against
II. But what classes of antI-prOhibi-